The Emporia weekly news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1881-1889, 1887-05-19

=
II. There has bean some evidenc
tending to show that the defendan
| was intoxicated at the time of the 81
legged offense, and therefore 1 deem i
proper to charge you as to the law, up
on the relation of drunkenness {.
crime.
i IL. A person who voluntarily make
himself drunk, or drinks enough intoxi
eating liquor to unduly excite his mind
does not thereby, lose his legal response
bility but as general rule, a man il
legally as much responsible for his act
when drunk, whatever may be ths
degree of his drunkenness, as he il
when sober.
IA. And 8 man whose peculiar menta
organization is such that the use of in
toxicants has the effect to SO excite
his nervous system, as to dethrOne his
viii, and render him violent, and tC
excite his brutal passions beyond con
troll. If he knowing this peculiar con.
| dition of himself, voluntarily drinks
| Intoxicating liquors, as a general rule
he does so at his peril, he takes the
chances. and not society.
Is. There Is one exception to this
general rule. Where the offense
| charged, is one in which the elements
of elaboration, and generalization, are
essential Ingredients, the fact of in
toxication and the extent thereof NAV
be considered, together with all the
other evidence in determining whether
these essential conditions existed at
the time of killing or not.
Is. If the evidence all considered
| together establishes the existence of
elaboration and generalization at the
time of the killing, then the defendant
| viii be held responsible, whatever may
have been his condition as to intoxica-
ton.
II. If you should find from the ev-
| idence, that by reason of a diseased
condition of the defendants mind, in
famed and excited partially by intoxi-
cation, and partially by excitement pro-
duced by the prior quarrel between
himself and the deceased, he at the
time of the shooting. or from any
cause then existing. was incapable of
elaboration or generalization, then he
cannot be guilty of murder in the first
degree. whether at the time of such
| shooting he was irresponsible by reason
of insanity alone or not.
10. In the absence of any evidence to
the contrary, the law presumes every
person to be sane and to intend the nat
| ural and ordinary consequences of his
voluntary acts.
10. The burden of proof rests upon
| the state, and does not shift or change
to the defendant in any stage or phase
of the case.
20. The defendant is presumed to be
innocent Of the charge made against
him, innocent Of every act alleged to
have been done and innocent of the
guilty intent, and this presumption re-
mains and abides with him and fur
nishes him with complete protection,
until the crime charged, and every ele-
ment and ingredient thereof, and the
defendants guilt of the same has been
established by the evidence beyond a
reasonable doubt.
q. You are the exclusive judges of
the evidence, of its weight and of the
credibility of the witnesses. and in de-
termining the credibility of any witness
you may properly consider the interest
of such witness in the result of the suit,
his bias or prejudice if any, for or
against the party for whom he testifies,
his intelligence, his powers of memory
and of observation, his opportunities
for knowing the facts about which he
testifies, his manner of testifying, his
demeanor and appearance on the wit
ness stand and any other fact disclosed
by the evidence which in your minds
may add to or detracG from the credi-
bility Of such witness.
% For the purpose of showing that
the defendant possessed a diseased
mental condition evidence has been
given of the mental condition of the
defendants family, extending back
several generations and also to collat-
teral branches of his family. This is
offered for the purpose of showing
mental disease in his family and of
hereditary transmission thereof to
dence you will consider the nearness,
or remoteness of the several persons
mentioned in the evidence, to the de-
PENDANT in blood kinship, remembering
what will be apparent to everyone,
that the farther removed such persons
may be, the greater will be the proba-
bility that the mental condition de-
scribed may have been due to some
cause other than transmission from de-
fendant's ancestor.
%. You also bear in mind that even
if the family of the defendant, both
near and remote, were affected with
mental disease, it will not conclusively
establish mental disease in the de-
PENDANT, but will be evidence proper
for you to consider in connection with
all the other evidence in the case. In
determining this fact, and after con-
siderinP all the circumstances, it will
be your duty to give it such weight as
in your judgment it is entitled to re-
ceive.
"a. Hypothetical questions have been
put to professional witnesses who have
thereupon expressed opinions as to the
mental condition of defendant at the
time of the shooting. 1t is your duty
to consider these answers and give
them such weight in your deliberations
as in your judgment they deserve.
Bearing in mind that the proper weight
to be given to them depends largely
clyilI nd of tho wit
nesses, upon the subject of mental dis
eases, and also upon whether the ques-
| lions put embraced all the material
facts in the case bearing upon this sub
| ject or not.
If the evidence in the case does not
| sustain the facts and all the facts as
sumed in the questions, then such an
swers ought to be disregarded.
25. If upon full fair and candid
| consideration of all the evidence in the
case. you should believe that the de-
PENDANT at the time and place mention
ed in the information was of SANE
mind to the extent hereinbefore stated
| in instructions number 10 and IL. and
that he then and there wilfully delib.
erately premeditately and with malice
aforethOught as herein before defined
shot and killed l.. D. Collier you viii
find the defendant guilty of murder in
the first degree.
26. If you do not so find you will con
slider further and if you believe from
the evidence that at the time aforesaid
the defendant was of sane mind as
aforesaid and shot and killed said Col
lier purposely and with malice afore
thought, but without generalization o.
deliberately then you will find hin
guilty of murder in the second degret
only.
| q. In the crime of murder there i!
also involved several degrees of man
slaughter, but as none of them are ap
plicable to the facts proven, do no
deem it necessary or proper to defin'
them or instruct you in relation thereto
If you do not find defendant guilty o
murder in either the first or second de
gree you will acquit him whether san
or insane.
%. Where a defendant is charges
with an offense consisting of two o
more degrees he can be convicted o
that degree thereof only concerning
which there exists no reasonable doubt
%. By a reasonable doubt is no
meant a mere captious or fancifu
doubt but by it is meant doubt which
after full, fair and candid consider